1 Feb 2008
MOULDER V CHECKPOINT METO LIMITED HC NAP CIV 2007-441-000578
- Citation
- openlaw-03e24198_9354_46b7_b01f_08588d7f5fc4.pdf
- Court
- High Court
Uplift refused: the respondent bore some responsibility for procedural confusion in the District Court pleadings, the appeal did not materially lengthen because of the further evidence, and the application to adduce further evidence had costs directed to lie where they fell; therefore no uplift and standard costs awarded to respondent on a 2B basis with disbursements fixed by the Registrar.